Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.

Call me crazy, but I don't think children should be walking around the library without their parents. If one's child is being supervised, then one wouldn't have to worry about said child seeing something maybe they shouldn't. In the off case that they do, sounds like you just need to have a discussion with that child about the situation. Censorship should not be an option.

At what age do you think kids are looking at porn sites? 15? Did your mommy have to hold your hand at the library when you were 15?

If the city and the librarians say no, then no. There is nothing else to say about it. They aleady have to pick and choose what publications they offer and as far as I know they didn't carry hard core magazines either.

And if they say yes then it's yes, and the people who object can go through proper channels if they want to change it.

It takes a person with a curious and inquisitive mind to grasp that concept.

Using emoticons to communicate? Geez Louise, that's brilliant!

What's the problem with emoticons? What do you see as the problem? Is it immature? What's more immature, using emoticons, or for a guy who claimed on another thread to be 70 years old to show his disdain for the fact that library administrators put computer terminals in sight of the librarians' desk through some sophomoric act of rebelliousness like writing "Wow, the librarian has a nice rack" on the screen just in case the librarian is watching? (see post 82.) Sounds like something I migh have done when I was, oh, twelve or so.

many libraries are filtering in order to receive "erate" funding from the department of Homeland security. those that aren't filtering must have better sources of funding than your basic small town.
So it may not be an issue with being progressive or not, just being too poor to say no to the federal funding

The job of a librarian is in part a job of denying access to certain materials they believe citizens do not need "Public" access to. Out of the Millions of books published each year a librarian grants the Public free access to probably a small number of them. Why can' t they do the same thing with the millions of website available?

The public library I frequent filters the computers in part because they can't possibly accommodate every one who would like view porn in the computer lab. (they call it a Lab not Lounge)

You make an excellent point here. When I saw the thread title, I was thinking at first that it referred to pornographic magazines and such. One issue with stocking such material is that there is only so much space in a library, so the librarians must set priorities about how that space is allocated. I would think that porn would be a very low-priority item.

I hadn't thought of this until reading Thrifty's post, but the same applies to computers as well. Personally, I like some of the policies of certain libraries, which have been related on here, such as access to different material in different computer rooms based on the limits parents set on library cards. However, in the interest of setting priorities in the allocation of resources, if a library had a situation where people checking out porn on the internet were monoplizing computers while others waited to use the computers for purposes with higher educational priority, it would be reasonable for the library to filter porn.

Actually, now that I think about it, given the finite space libraries have, I have some real respect for librarians who are dedicated to doing the serious work needed to choose a large but limited collection of high-quality material which will be of interest to the widest possible range of patrons. That's got to be a tough job.

The job of a librarian is in part a job of denying access to certain materials they believe citizens do not need "Public" access to. Out of the Millions of books published each year a librarian grants the Public free access to probably a small number of them. Why can' t they do the same thing with the millions of website available?

No, I strongly disagree. The job of the librarian is to give public access to as many materials as possible. They are limited only by budgetary constraints.

Our local library offers unlimited internet access in the adult section. I have yet to see someone walking around with a raging erection or doing anything inappropriate in the computer area. Those who are trying to say that would be a problem are just being ridiculous.

The add-on privacy filters for your monitor are cheap and easy to add on. They have the added benefit of giving your more privacy for viewing emails, etc. That way, the people who want to let their young children roam around unsupervised in the adult section can rest assured that while their child might easily pick up all sorts of inappropriate literature, at least they won't see it on a computer screen.

And you get to decide what those things are and at which ages said exposure is tolerable? Maybe for your kids, but not for everyone else's.

And we're not talking about putting up porn posters. We're just talking about free access to the internet. So you still have to log in, purposely go to the site, and you usually have to PAY to get any of the good stuff. Or so I hear...

Do you really think that is a danger to your kids?

I don't HAVE kids--again. But does that mean I should be allowed to expose YOUR kids to things you might not want them exposed to? If there is no possibility of your kids seeing what I'm looking at on the computer--then, fine, yes, let me look at whatever it is I want to look at. Don't filter out the dating sites, don't filter out MySpace or Facebook, don't filter out anything. The problem is if the computers are in an open, publicly accessible space where kids could potentially see something their parent might not want them exposed to.

Every parent would have their OWN sense of limits--so, by the same token--I cannot decide for some kid what I think they should be allowed to see because that's the parent's job. So the limitations must be at the MOST stringent. If the parent wants them to see more, let the parent do so.

When I'm home--by myself, or with only my partner, I like to wear as little as possible. I'd walk around nude. If you came to my house, would you have a problem with me walking around naked in my own home? Or should I put on some clothes when I have company?

A lot of people read Playboy for the articles. Many libraries loan videos of popular movies---some of which are R-rated. It is not uncommon in the 21st century for serious and legitimate material to contain elements that are likely to offend people who call a nipple 'pornography'.

While this is true, our local library doesn't carry Playboy. It filters out many sites, including those of a prurient nature, as well as a number of dating sites and social networking sites. Why THAT is, I really don't know. I was going to those sites primarily for forum discussions anyhow, but the dating sites I was going to did not have any nudity in them--so why they were blocked, I can't say.

This is a perfect time to thin the herd. Let's tell those undesirables, its legal so when they connect we can call the police. Then we relocate those idiots to a remote island near the North Pole. Of course, I'm joking.

Honestly, this is shameful and plain stupid. I think, at sometime or another, we all look at porn...in privacy! Anyone that would consider viewing that material in proximity to children should be immediately arrested. I have no tolerance for child abuse because that's what it is, abuse.

Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.